Share this

Catastrophes like we have seen in Japan are always treated as unthinkable, until they happen. As we do all that we can to help the Japanese grapple with the consequences of the earthquake, tsunami and their ongoing nuclear crisis, we also must conduct a comprehensive re-evaluation of the safety of U.S. nuclear plants and waste storage facilities and our policy on nuclear power in general.

I have called on President Obama to establish a Presidential Commission on Nuclear Safety. An presidential commission should include independent scientists and experts, not just industry representatives or government regulators. It should have broad authority and a mandate to independently review the safety of every existing nuclear reactor and waste site in the United States.

Second, there should be a moratorium on all licensing and re-licensing decisions by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission until the presidential commission is able to issue its report and Congress has an opportunity to consider any legislative changes necessary in light of the report.

Third, we should revisit the law which provides taxpayer-subsidized insurance to the nuclear industry. In the event of a nuclear tragedy in the United States, should the taxpayers of this country be asked to provide billions of dollars in compensation to the victims of such a tragedy or, in a free enterprise society such as ours, should the nuclear industry itself take full responsibility to secure insurance in the private market for all consequences of such an unthinkable tragedy?

Fourth, with questions surrounding nuclear safety, the high cost of building new plants, and the unsolved problem of storing extremely hazardous radioactive waste, we should reconsider providing government-backed loans to new nuclear power plants.

The federal government has $18.5 billion in existing loan guarantee authority for new nuclear power plants and has requested an additional $36 billion for an anticipated expansion of the nuclear power sector. It makes more sense to me to stop issuing new nuclear loan guarantees, to withdraw the request for $36 billion in additional authority, and instead to reallocate existing unobligated nuclear loan funds to energy efficiency and safer, more cost effective forms of energy production such as solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal.

Finally, it is wrong that the federal government has completely preempted state regulation of nuclear power plants with respect to safety. In the final analysis, it will be people who live in the vicinity of nuclear power plants who will have to bear the burden of any tragedy that might occur, and for this reason alone they should play a meaningful role in deciding whether or not the safety risk is acceptable.

More POLITICO Arena

About the Arena

The Arena is a cross-party, cross-discipline forum for intelligent and lively conversation about political and policy issues. Contributors have been selected by POLITICO staff and editors. David Mark, Arena's moderator, is a Senior Editor at POLITICO. Each morning, POLITICO sends a question based on that day's news to all contributors.